Volunteer sir sanders zingmore Posted March 14, 2021 Volunteer Posted March 14, 2021 Summary... do I really need to? You already know the conclusion Read on http://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/02/measurements-ethernet-cables-and-audio.html?m=1 5 1
Ittaku Posted March 14, 2021 Posted March 14, 2021 The most interesting part of that article was the chord company getting sued for misleading advertising on one of their snake oil products and losing. We need more of this https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/the-chord-company-ltd-a14-274211.html#.VN2WRPldV8H 2
Steffen Posted March 14, 2021 Posted March 14, 2021 36 minutes ago, sir sanders zingmore said: Summary... do I really need to? You already know the conclusion We also know that no amount of evidence is going to convince those who want to believe otherwise. The buyers of audiophile cables, switches, EtherRegens etc. will rush to the defense of their captors, as they always do. Stockholm syndrome in full motion. 2
Ittaku Posted March 14, 2021 Posted March 14, 2021 26 minutes ago, Steffen said: We also know that no amount of evidence is going to convince those who want to believe otherwise. The buyers of audiophile cables, switches, EtherRegens etc. will rush to the defense of their captors, as they always do. Stockholm syndrome in full motion. I wonder how they'd feel if Audioquest was sued for its misleading advertising on ethernet/usb/coaxial/hdmi/power cables and lost?
Metal-Fan Posted March 15, 2021 Posted March 15, 2021 (edited) 18 hours ago, Ittaku said: The most interesting part of that article was the chord company getting sued for misleading advertising on one of their snake oil products Yeah, I made reference to that article a little while ago in a cable thread. It was ignored. No surprises there. As far as I am concerned "Audiophiles" deserve to get ripped off as even in the face of scientific and engineering evidence that fly's in the face of their claims they still refuse to acknowledge they maybe wrong. Nothing will change so let them live in their world and the rest of us can live in ours. As they only represent less than 1 percent of the population that listens to music on a regular basis and are literally a dying breed, I guess the manufacturers of boutique/audiophile equipment have to charge what they do. Edited March 15, 2021 by oldf%$ker 4
Guest Eggcup the Dafter Posted March 15, 2021 Posted March 15, 2021 Noise/RFI may be the reason why some people get an improvement from specialist Ethernet cables or switches. I can't see why the noise rejection properties of a mtre and a half of cat 5e twisted pair wouldn't be good enough, but that's where I would look. I tested my old system with a length of cat3 cable that was dropping packets in it and there was no audible difference in the sound between that and an AudioQuest ethernet cable. I take it from that that a pretty extreme issue would be needed for any actual effect to appear. I'm not a complete sceptic around this matter (rare for me), and there's a chance that a quieter switch, audio or otherwise, may better mitigate noise from a long length of cable or a noise source further up the way. You'd need to properly measure all of it to tell. Most of the rest of it, such as special clocks in Ethernet switches - that's just nonsense. The data is buffered in the streamer, so any clock upstream of that wither works or doesn't.
Ittaku Posted March 15, 2021 Posted March 15, 2021 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Eggcup the Dafter said: Most of the rest of it, such as special clocks in Ethernet switches - that's just nonsense. The data is buffered in the streamer, so any clock upstream of that wither works or doesn't. Aye, same with any asynchronous interface where the timing of data coming in has absolutely no bearing on the timing of data being reconstructed into audio which is happening to a completely different timeframe, not just being "retimed" (i.e. USB as well as ethernet.) Edited March 15, 2021 by Ittaku 1
aussievintage Posted March 15, 2021 Posted March 15, 2021 It's good to see some sensible discussion around this and similar subjects. 19 hours ago, Ittaku said: We need more of this https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/the-chord-company-ltd-a14-274211.html#.VN2WRPldV8H That reads like chord made absolutely zero attempts to actually test and justify the claims. Instead of at least running DBTs, even if they could find nothing to measure, they just relied on the numbers of people who were gullible enough to believe it worked, as "proof" that it did work. Sounds awfully circular to me. 4
BugPowderDust Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 22 hours ago, Ittaku said: Aye, same with any asynchronous interface where the timing of data coming in has absolutely no bearing on the timing of data being reconstructed into audio which is happening to a completely different timeframe, not just being "retimed" (i.e. USB as well as ethernet.) The snakeoil manufacturers are having a field day as most people know about as much about networking as they do about more obtuse audio concepts like jitter and can be easily persuaded that there is a problem to fix when it's already been solved aeons ago. The industry as a whole loves to create issues where none exist as it sells product. Add in a healthy dose of confirmation bias, some also due to the way our auditory systems work and they have a perfect storm. I'm all for people tinkering with effective solutions to problems but when they are hoodwinked by the more disingenuous amongst us, I find it pretty distasteful. 2
Ittaku Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 15 minutes ago, BugPowderDust said: I'm all for people tinkering with effective solutions to problems but when they are hoodwinked by the more disingenuous amongst us, I find it pretty distasteful. Distasteful is correct, and when those of us who understand the science and technology try to explain it to them so they're not being ripped off by snake oil merchants, we instead get lambasted by them. Thus, we end up with a huge divide between us and a marketing world (and in this case also a forum) which "protects" them from us, allowing them to hang themselves. 3
bob_m_54 Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 On 15/03/2021 at 2:15 PM, aussievintage said: It's good to see some sensible discussion around this and similar subjects. That reads like chord made absolutely zero attempts to actually test and justify the claims. Instead of at least running DBTs, even if they could find nothing to measure, they just relied on the numbers of people who were gullible enough to believe it worked, as "proof" that it did work. Sounds awfully circular to me. To be fair, they ain't Robinson Crusoe, in that respect.. LOL 1
bob_m_54 Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 5 hours ago, Ittaku said: Distasteful is correct, and when those of us who understand the science and technology try to explain it to them so they're not being ripped off by snake oil merchants, we instead get lambasted by them. Thus, we end up with a huge divide between us and a marketing world (and in this case also a forum) which "protects" them from us, allowing them to hang themselves. Sometimes you just gotta shake ya head and move on eh? ... LOL 1
Stereophilus Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 On 15/03/2021 at 12:25 PM, oldf%$ker said: As far as I am concerned "Audiophiles" deserve to get ripped off as even in the face of scientific and engineering evidence that fly's in the face of their claims they still refuse to acknowledge they maybe wrong. How do you define "Audiophiles" in this statement? Probably very differently to me. I suspect you mean the section of the (broader) audiophile community who buy equipment based solely on listening experience? And saying that people who use subjective experience as a purchasing motivator deserve to get ripped off (aside from being petty and mean) is bizarre. Firstly because human beings make subjective purchasing decisions all the time. It is in our nature to use our senses to decide our choices. Secondly because you are imposing your values to judge their decision. Regardless of a measured technical outcome, if "their" investment satisfies "them", then they are not being ripped off... that is just your superimposed view from the outside. On 15/03/2021 at 12:25 PM, oldf%$ker said: Nothing will change so let them live in their world and the rest of us can live in ours. As they only represent less than 1 percent of the population that listens to music on a regular basis and are literally a dying breed, I guess the manufacturers of boutique/audiophile equipment have to charge what they do. The us vs them mentality is a sad product of of the very same inflexible thinking you accuse "Audiophiles" of possessing. The denial of audible difference in the absence of measurable difference is really just lazy science. There remains a great opportunity to explore and expand the science of audio reproduction and human hearing. 7
Volunteer sir sanders zingmore Posted March 16, 2021 Author Volunteer Posted March 16, 2021 4 minutes ago, Stereophilus said: The denial of audible difference in the absence of measurable difference is really just lazy science. No. It isn’t. To claim audible difference in the absence of proper controls is lazy science. 2
muon* Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 (edited) 14 minutes ago, sir sanders zingmore said: No. It isn’t. To claim audible difference in the absence of proper controls is lazy science. Real science would posit the question of why? Without falling back on escape routes like the usual ones, but we are talking about Engineers here Edit: I say let the Engineers continue to apply their extensive social science and psychology here as it is entertaining. Edited March 16, 2021 by muon* 1
Stereophilus Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 12 minutes ago, sir sanders zingmore said: No. It isn’t. I disagree. Some simple measurements do not tackle the breadth of the potential issue being contended. Hence it is lazy. 15 minutes ago, sir sanders zingmore said: To claim audible difference in the absence of proper controls is lazy science. Agreed, but that does not exclude what I said.
Volunteer sir sanders zingmore Posted March 16, 2021 Author Volunteer Posted March 16, 2021 2 minutes ago, muon* said: Real science would posit the question of why? Without falling back on escape routes like the usual ones, but we are talking about Engineers here Actually real science would say something like “there are many well understood reasons (with proper research behind them) that explain why a difference is perceived. If there is still a difference once these well established reasons are eliminated then it gets interesting.” 1
Volunteer sir sanders zingmore Posted March 16, 2021 Author Volunteer Posted March 16, 2021 3 minutes ago, Stereophilus said: Agreed, but that does not exclude what I said. In general it does. The search for missing/undiscovered measurements of audibility are completely pointless if you haven't first established audibility itself
Stereophilus Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 47 minutes ago, sir sanders zingmore said: In general it does. The search for missing/undiscovered measurements of audibility are completely pointless if you haven't first established audibility itself This is exactly my point. There are (many) unanswered questions that require a thorough methodology to reach valid conclusions about what we hear when we reproduce recorded music and why. The research I have seen so far only scratches the surface. 1
andyr Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 1 hour ago, sir sanders zingmore said: No. It isn’t. To claim audible difference in the absence of proper controls is lazy science. C'mon, Trev - you SB! IMO, you're conflating two different things: What @Stereophilus was saying - which I understood to mean ... the simple measurements that current technology allows us to take does not cover all the sonic differences that we can hear, and To claim difference without rigorous testing controls is faulty. Andy 1
bob_m_54 Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 it's a pointless discussion though... you could lay a dead parrot down in front of some people, and they'd tell it isn't dead, it's just resting.... 1
Stereophilus Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 4 minutes ago, bob_m_54 said: it's a pointless discussion though... you could lay a dead parrot down in front of some people, and they'd tell it isn't dead, it's just resting.... How do you know its dead? (Sorry, I couldn't resist!) 1
andyr Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 4 minutes ago, bob_m_54 said: it's a pointless discussion though... you could lay a dead parrot down in front of some people, and they'd tell it isn't dead, it's just resting.... Aaah, but the only people who would say "it isn't dead, it's just resting " are Oxford-educated toffs. Andy 1
aussievintage Posted March 16, 2021 Posted March 16, 2021 1 hour ago, muon* said: Real science would posit the question of why? Without falling back on escape routes like the usual ones, but we are talking about Engineers here Edit: I say let the Engineers continue to apply their extensive social science and psychology here as it is entertaining. I always wonder why people conflate scientist and engineer. 1
Recommended Posts